Agenda item

To consider a report of the Chief Planning Officer on the current position in respect of an outline application for proposed employment development for use classes B1(B) and B1(C) (research and development/light industrial uses), B2 (general industrial uses) and B8 (storage and distribution uses) with new accesses, associated infrastructure and landscaping

(report attached)

Plans and photographs were displayed at the meeting.  A

Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  Officers presented the report which provided the current position in respect of proposals for an employment development on a 28.3 hectare undeveloped, former opencast mine site in Gildersome

  Members were informed that there were a large number of issues to be resolved on this site and these included particularly complex highways issues.  As set out in the previous report, the application was subject to a Holding Direction by the Highways Agency which had been extended to January 31^st 2013

  The topography of the site was challenging as there were substantial changes in levels on the site.  In addition, a small residential development abutted into the site and a public right of way cut centrally across the site to a public footpath which runs down the western site boundary

  Two vehicular access points into the site were proposed; one at Gelderd Road and the other from Asquith Avenue, both of which caused Officers concerns – at Gelderd Road the signals at this location were over capacity and could not be improved and in terms of Asquith Avenue, the presence of HGVs on this road should not be encouraged; discussions were ongoing but as the development would be so large, it would need a number of access points and would give rise to local impacts.  There was also the point as to whether a highway linkage should be made across the beck, given the toporgraphy and ecological corridor

  Drainage was another issue on the site with local concerns being raised about flood risk.  Although £300,000 was proposed towards flood mitigation, Gildersome Parish Council’s concerns about flooding remained

  The quantum of development and the impact of this on long distance views was also a concern, particularly in view of one of the units potentially being as large as the White Rose Shopping Centre

  Panel discussed the report and commented on the following matters:

·  that an access on Asquith Avenue did not work and that an access from Nepshaw Lane South should be considered as two main routes were likely to be needed

·  that there were no bus services on the Gelderd Road frontage of the site and that the existing bus services in this area were being depleted

·  that the sum put forward for water mitigation measures was not index-linked and that third-party land ownership would be required to deliver them

·  that issues relating to highways, off site works and public transport had not been addressed and that much more work was needed on the proposals

·  the possibility of the water mitigation measures being tied into the nearby woodland to provide environmental benefits

·  that vehicular access to the site from Nepshaw Lane South should be considered and that Asquith A  venue was not suitable for vehicular access serving the development as it was too narrow, although two main routes into the site should be provided

·  concerns about the size of the proposed units and whilst accepting that the site was earmarked for development, that there was a need to protect the amenity of the residents living in the properties located within the site

The Chief Planning Officer stated that the site was allocated for employment and that jobs were needed but that there were particular issues with the site which needed to be considered and that a design brief for the site should be provided.  The quantum and form of the floorspace would need to be controlled and that a robust travel plan would be required

The need for a range of employment sites to be available within Leeds was stressed as was the need to react positively to planning issues on challenging sites such as this one, particularly in view of the length of time taken to progress this site

In addressing the specific points raised in the report, Members

provided the following responses:

·  to note Members’ comments concerning the principle of development

·  that the applicant’s proposals to improve accessibility were not appropriate to the site and that Asquith Avenue was not suitable for vehicular access and that Nepshaw Lane South should be considered as a more suitable access point

·  that Members did not consider the extent of the access arrangements were sufficient to deal with the anticipated level of traffic and that a design brief was needed

·  to note Members’ comments regarding the scope of the Highways assessment

·  to note Members’ comments on the scope of the highway conditions and the Section 106 agreement

·  that the extent of the landscaping proposals were not sufficient to allow the development to proceed and this needed to be addressed

·  that regarding nature conservation, there was the possibility of linking the water features to the woodland to provide ecological benefits

·  that further information was required on the drainage improvements

·  that the applicant be encouraged to work with the Council on a suitable development brief for the site

RESOLVED -  To note the report and the comments now made